Vuelta a España Stage 12 Preview

onThursday, 31 August 2017

A day for breakaway but a short stage at just 160km.

Stage 11 Review: a wet day with cold conditions at altitude which might explain plenty. The stage had one winner and plenty of losers, notably Orica-Scott and BMC Racing. The day’s breakaway contained veteran Igor Anton who was not far down on GC so Sky kept the move in check which spoilt the day for Romain Bardet, also in the break. Then Orica-Scott took up the pace as if they had a plan in mind and later fired Simon Yates up the road but Esteban Chaves would lose two minutes and Adam Yates nine. Meanwhile Tejay van Garderen lost of three minutes and Nicolas Roche lost four. The result is Esteban Chaves is third overall while BMC’s riders dropped out of the top-10.

Miguel Ángel López won the stage. He’s called “Superman” but not because he has a cape nor because he tucks his shirt into his underwear neither because he flies through the air in pantyhose. Instead thieves tried to take his bike off him once and stabbed him in the leg but he fought them off. So rain and cold conditions probably don’t worry him. Another winner was Vincenzo Nibali who finished third and on the same time as Chris Froome, he was in charge of the race at times and he’ll take comfort from this. Wilco Kelderman impressed too.

The Route: 16okm, first along the coast and then inland for the climbs. The first climb of the Puerto de Leon is 17.4km at 4.9% but includes a downhill section and the mode gradient is more like 6-7% and there’s a 10% section. Next comes El Torcal, 7.6km at 7% which includes the intermediate sprint but it’s 8-10% through the “sprint” and only eases towards the top.

The Finish: the route circles Antequera on flat roads but final kilometre is uphill, not a climb but a pronounced gradient between the 800m to go point and 300m.

The Contenders: another breakaway, another lottery? Perhaps but as a rule once riders start to show in the breakaways they continue to do so during a grand tour. So Julian Alaphilippe is an obvious pick, at ease on the climbs and he packs a powerful sprint. L-L Sanchez is another breakaway specialist and Astana team mate Alexey Lutsenko is a powerful type for today. Otherwise Matteo Trentin is the safe pick but his win two days ago was a surprise and to repeat this over more mountains would be even more of a shock especially as everyone is now aware of his polyvalence.

–

Julian Alaphilippe, Alexey Lutsenko

Sanchez, Marzcynski, Trentin, Roux, De Gendt, Geniez

Weather: dry, there will be a mix of sunshine and clouds with a top temperature of 26°C.

TV: It’s on La1 in Spain and Eurosport around much of the world and often on the same broadcaster you watch the Tour de France on. The finish is forecast for 5.40pm CEST.

Daily Díaz: Protohistory is a period between prehistory and history, during which a culture or civilization has not yet developed writing but other cultures have already noted its existence in their own writings. Today’s stage covers a couple of protohistoric issues. The first 75 km run along the coast. The Phoenicians (inventors of the alphabet), in the 1st millennium BC, sailed the Mediterranean sea, establishing contact with less developed peoples. That’s how Almuñécar (KM14) was born, as a trade point between the Eastern traders and the local miners. Even more ancient are the monuments of the Antequera Dolmens Site. Megaliths are found in many places around Europe, and these are some of the best preserved of Spain. They are a UNESCO World Heritage Site since 2016.

Nice punt at Anthony Roux – he’s been doing surprisingly well in the mountains (for a big guy) and if he could hang on, the slight uphill finish would suit his fast strong legs.

Meanwhile, my man Jungels showed very poor form yesterday, but Superman Lopez made more than up for that!

Today will probably see Quick Step add to their tally, but I’m expecting another dig by Nibali for GC as well, and maybe the Yateses trying to get into the breakaway? Btw, don’t underestimate that opening stretch along the coast, it has some “capi” in it with slopes of up to 10 %!

Yesterday was a strange stage, the sudden weather change seemed to affect most of the riders. Chris Froome battled through it all to take time on all his rivals. As so often he seemed to beat them all by sheer force of willpower. His team were strong too, some of them seemingly unaffected by the climatic conditions, at one point Mikel Nieve even appeared to be trying for stage victory. It will be interesting to see if Miguel Lopez can continue to impress, more performances like yesterday and he will be Astana’s main threat (such that it is) on GC. Vincenzo Nibali is the only realistic competition to CF for the title, though for him to win, there would probably have to be some sort of incident or accident (Giro 2016??). Wilko Kelderman did well perhaps an outside bet for the podium and Alberto Contador ‘s farewell tour continued to be reasonably successful without ever threatening a win.

The peloton will welcome a return to warmer dryer conditions and will probably be happy to let breaks go today and tomorrow before the long climbs at the weekend

I’ve watched Froome for years now and seen him do his there where he gets distanced and comes back a ton of times, seemingly especially in the Vuelta. But still I was convinced watching yesterday’s stage that he was struggling. On the first climb he looked like he was struggling to hold his team mates wheels and then again on the second, then he drifted to the back and Nieve seemed to be going too quick for him. Then hey presto he drops just about everyone! I think Nibali thought he was struggling too hence putting his team on the front and at one point seeming to go and have a look at Froome. Maybe Froome was struggling but he can just dig it out and knows he can distance people if he sucks up the pain. Or I just read it wrong more likely.

I got the impression yesterday that Froome wasn’t enjoying the weather — he enjoys warm and hot — but that he was pedaling to Watts to make sure he didn’t crack at any stage (“I know I can consume l continue to pedal at X Watts for X time, so I will.”) As soon as the finish was in sight, he went. Given what he will take off everybody at the time trail, Nibali seems good only key rival, and as I’m sure RonDe will tell us in just a moment, Nibali never beats Froome in a GT

Yeah, that’s always my impression, that he’s riding to watts. If he was truly bluffing he’d have to call back the domestiques too, which I don’t think he did, as he’s happy for Nibali and others to push that little too hard while he sticks to his numbers.

David Millar, commentating on UK TV, put it well. He pointed out that Froome does have a bluff, where he drops to the back to give the impression he is struggling, then will surge later. He’s used that tactic before… but due to his riding style you can never tell if Froome is doing the bluff, or if he is actually struggling.

From what I’ve seen Froome’s ‘tell’ is getting out of the saddle when climbing at tempo. He often gets out of the saddle to attack or to counter, but almost never when riding uphill in a group. An example of this was the stage in the Tour which finished at the altiport (sorry I forget the name of the place); as the group was getting to the top of the climb prior to the start of the runway he got out of the saddle at least three times while riding on Landa’s wheel, and was (for Froome at least) turning a big gear, then sure enough he cracked climbing up the runway. I wondered at the time why nobody attacked him, since he was clearly tiring (I say this from the comfort of my armchair…). I think that if Froome is sitting and pedaling, even if he’s drifting back slightly, he’s comfortable. If he gets out of the saddle just to hold the wheel- then you know he’s on the ropes.

History would have us believe he’ll crack at some point, but he’s actually looking to get in better shape as the race goes on. As a Belgian, I can only be envious of our Dutch neighbors and their wave of GC riders.

The Netherlands has indeed great GC riders, but almost none serious contender in the spring classics. It’s perhaps a culture thing. Young Dutch talents want to become the next Gesink, young Belgium talents want to become the new Boonen.

For today I am 99% sure that we see no GC contender in the top-10. A big break away with a Polish guy in the top-3. Also Pauwels, Roux and Polanc are strong enough to win. And what about (again) Soler?

It depends. If someone like the Yateses or Roche decide to join the break to hunt for a stage and claw some time back, we could once again see Sky control the gap to ~ 3 min, and Bahrein/QS/Sunweb/Orico hunt down the escapees to defend their podiums. Everything screams breakaway, but this is the Vuelta, where everything can happen…

It is curious indeed. We have Terpstra of course, who really is a classics rider. And van Baarle with a lot of potential (or not even just potential anymore with a 4th place in Flanders). But the likes of Mollema, Poels, Gesink (used to be at least) and others seem to focus on GC and stage races mostly while they are capable of winning classics like Liege, Amstel, Fleche, Lombardy, … (or already have, San Sebas/Liege).

AG2R Are not in the top ten, and Romain Bardet is over 20 minutes back – could be a day for him to have some fun; couple of decent lumps to get up and down. I note he is not mentioned though. I’d have thought on his showing so far, that big mountain stages may be out of his reach as the GC will take those on, so perhaps today is a decent chance for a stage win – terrain suitable and GC may not be that interested.

Did anybody expect Bardet to actually have a realistic chance at the GC? I had thought that he was here mainly to get some serious riding into his legs — two GTs in a season — to harden him up for the eventual attempt to be the first French Tour winner since Hinault? Given that, surely he’s here to have a pop on some stages and that’s it? A fine lineup addition, and with plenty of stages for which he’s dangerous, but no more than a single stage contender.

No doubting the favourites for today but I think Nibali may upset the apple cart. He tried to break Froome for a while yesterday and failed…but came quite close. This is one of only two stages when he may fancy trying again because he was so close yesterday and see if he can do him on the descent.

Maybe a forlorn hope as he will simply drag Froome to the line but he may well take the option if he thinks he can’t break him on the summit finishes. to come.

Well it is good that he tries. As we saw in the Tour there are days that Froome was struggeling a bit and not the best rider on the road. But since nobody attacked, nobody knew. You have got to test him a bit every day and not just ride to the top in his wheel, then there will be days that you can take some time. So Nibali has to keep trying.

That’s the good thing about Nibali and Contador (unlike other people in the top-10) – no matter what, they will keep on trying to cause an upset to Froome. Sky know this from experience though, so unfortunately I can’t see another Formigal unfold.

I agree. I had half expected a Froome/Contador alliance to emerge as both would have something to gain from it, and it would be amusing to see the two great rivals working together. Nibali has to vary the point of attack as has already been intimated to get one over Froome, but AC must be playing for different reasons and I think his actions/tactics are even harder to predict. Makes things exciting. I hope that all three racers get to the finish without incident as, aside from anything else, it will be interesting to see how it pans-out. Big shuffle of the GC yesterday.

I thought the rest day interview with CF was interesting in respect to his approach to the Vuelta in contrast to the TdF.

I don’t think Froome was anywhere near cracking. Barring sickness or falling off, he has this in the bag. The others cannot take time on the climbs – and are lucky if they manage to equal them – and he’ll slaughter them in the time trial.

We now have what I’d consider a more realistic GC classification. Froome at least two and a half minutes better than everyone with Nibali floating somewhere in between. Its a case of sit on Nibali for the Tour winner now, surely? It was interesting to read the comments on Froome’s style that some made above. Was he in trouble or wasn’t he? I don’t have anymore information than anyone else but I do note he seems prepared to suffer like a dog and go very deep to survive. The efforts yesterday seemed solely aimed at staying with Nibali and it was telling that once he clawed his way to the Italian’s wheel he sat up and looked at The Shark as if to say “I don’t need to chase Lopez and I don’t need to drop you. You need to drop me”. Nibali looked genuinely tired crossing the line so I don’t buy the comments that I see doing the rounds on message boards where they post sarcastic memes that “Someone needs to go all in to attack Froome” as if, somehow, Nibali (and earlier Contador) weren’t trying. This isn’t Pro-Cycling Manager. We’re dealing with human beings with physical limitations here. Nibali himself has already pointed out the riders are flying and its not as if challenging Froome won’t hurt you too!

Nibali certainly went all-in yesterday. That attack on the part before the final bend was grueling due to the incline, the head-wind, and the length of the effort. Due to Froome’s particular style, it’s impossible to say how close he was to breaking, but I’m sure he was relieved he made it back to Nibali’s wheel.

Agree! Infact the general trend you see in the last couple of GTs, most of the young-guns have still to notch up a podium and they are happy to fight for it. Very few contenders willing to go all out for the win. On Stage 11, there was none for Nibali to collaborate on upsetting Froome. Bertie looked like it in the initial attack, but subsequently he wasnt following through his turns to pull. And there was none else to try, everyone else (Lopez, Wilco were happy to track wheels, fair enough for them).
With a weaker team this year (Bahrain-Merida versus Astana), Nibali lacks the support to make the race harder. Although to be fair, Pelizzotti and others surprised in their work yesterday.
However, I still see some hope for a contest. With Froome probably accumulating fatigue from Le Tour, he might eventually crack in one of these long stages to even out the contest.

Truly incredible riding by Moscon. A rider with no grand tour experience and who isn’t known as a climber going up big mountains better than some of the best climbers in the world. (And Nieve seems even stronger than he was in the Tour, unlike the riders on other teams.) Take that Chaves, Aru, Yates. And watch in awe as Moscon brings back Nibali and Contador.
Astonishing how Sky have such a knack of always having one rider other than their leader who is just on exceptional form in grand tours – they almost always have at least one rider who can stay with all the other best riders in the world until the final few km.

Yes, both of them achieved incredible form whilst ‘out of competition’.
We know it’s not down to doping – those huge numbers of corticosteroid doses Sky’s doctor had were for non-riding staff plus those are not illegal out of competition anyway, and the testosterone patches were delivered accidentally.

Numerous staff/riders seem to have left British Cycling/Sky with some kind of resentment and perhaps even desire of payback. At this point, I’d imagine any ex-employee who blows the whistle on routine doping could make a lot of money too. Yet for all that, “go and have a baby” is where it’s at.

“(and only Sky)”
What a whny zthing to say.
You can’t mention the name Contador without some loony bloke says steak, no ex-SU rider who rides well without someone raising eyebrwows and questions. Spaniards are all guilty of Fuente, Italians of Ferrari. but only the cleanest riders of the world come from Great Britain, the old cycling nation best known for great historic GT riders. How can anyone raise his eyebrows then when they say the drugs are for staff, not riders? Brits never lie, says Tony Blair….

If they were smashing corticosteroids you’d see loads of Sky riders going down with knee injuries as it strengthens your muscles whilst weakening the tendons. Hence both Hinault and Fignon going down with the dodgy knees in the mid 80’s at the height of the cortico era.

Over 50 doses of triamcinolone. You’d have to be a conspiracy theory whack job to believe that this many doses of this relatively dangerous drug was for non-riding staff. You’d also have to be severely lacking in the most basic knowledge of how science works to believe that if they gave you these drugs in the 80s and it resulted in dodgy knees, they didn’t learn in the intervening 30 years better ways of giving the drugs.

I think with Kwiatkowski and Moscon, and any other slightly heavier power rider, when you see them drilling it on a climb for 70% of the way you have to remember that they are only doing it for 70% (or whatever) of the climb and then more or less grinding to a halt and rolling in chatting to their mates. I’d also take into consideration that Kwiatkowski is pretty small himself, weighing no more than most GC men, so why shouldn’t he go fast up hill and has finished 11th on the Tour himself anyway so clearly is no duffer.

Kwiato and Moscon are the time trial champions of their respective countries. The former has been world champion and that long before he pulled on the Sky jersey. They’re not also rans. The Internet conspiracists with spittle flecked lips and wild eyes always act as if these people were guys off the street who suddenly became champions. Far from it.

Moscon is Italian time trial champ.
Which goes precisely no way to explaining why he’s suddenly climbing so well, even if he doesn’t do all of the climbs.

After all we’ve learned about Sky’s methods, you’re still denouncing anyone who questions them as ‘wild-eyed conspiracists’.
Despite Moscon having gone from zero history in mountains to what we see now.

And as we all know, if someone has won the junior Giro di Lombardia and is a second year pro in his first Grand Tour you would expect them to be pulling back multiple grand tour winners in the last ~12km of a stage of long climbs.
Anyone questioning that is a tin foil hat-wearing loon.

What previous opportunity has Moscon had to show his mountain chops? You’re effectively saying no rider is allowed to develop, improve or get better in areas they had formerly not excelled. Yes, that’s wild-eyed conspiracy in my view.

Please chill.
Accept most people here know their stuff when it comes to cycling and are able to make up their own minds or are happy to wait for further proof before doing so. If you have some great, if not this isn’t the place for backwash chat. We’re all nice here, not the ignorant fools you take us for.

I disagree. I think it’s a fair point to bring up. I’m also a fan of freedom of speech. As for everyone here being nice… whenever someone, e.g. Ferdi or Larry T, puts forward an opinion that does not conform to the majority on here your assertion is rapidly and thoroughly disproved. And you yourself are trying to stop the discussion of others.

It’s disappointing to see people claiming DAVE is somehow trying to ‘silence’ their contributions.

What DAVE is taking issue with is that virtually all doping related commentary tends to be cheap, lowest common denominator innuendo that brings absolutely nothing new to the conversation. It gets old very quickly hearing the same tired wisecracks over and over.

This has absolutely nothing to do with turning a blind eye to doping. Anyone who frequents this site knows the sport is far from clean.

Of course people can and should be able to say what they want. But don’t be surprised if you make a garbage contribution and it’s called out.

Thanks for this DAVE – expressing the sentiment my “save it for The Clinic” comment came from but my tired and irritable mind couldn’t be bothered to express. We can all make our own minds up with evidence, and as there is nothing new regarding Sky it gets remarkably boring for me to wade through. Rumour and innuendo sours an otherwise typically excellent comments section. It’s not only here in the comments though – The Guardian are terrible for regurgitating the Sky/British Cycling controversy in practically every article re: Froome or cycling in general, almost as if they think “oh, it’s a potential new person to the sport, we must tell them and make sure it doesn’t get swept under the rug”. Same goes for Mo Farah/Salazar.

In my daily browse through the various classifications I note that Froome is highly placed in all of them (1st in two and 2nd in the other two). Since the overall winner is often odds on to win the “combined” jersey they have at this race it seems likely Froome might win several of the jerseys on offer. He’s currently second on the points jersey (by 3 pts) but with stages where he will certainly score more than Matteo Trentin to come. In the KOM jersey Villella has a 17 point lead but will he contest the big mountain days that Froome will be forced to? I always regarded it is frivolous talk to suggest that Froome might win all the jerseys here but it seems there is a rerasonable possibility.

INRNG, thanks for the excellent blog, I’d be interested to learn your thoughts on what is behind the repeated fast starts to the stages / the apparent trouble involved in forming the days break. I don’t seem to recall this being such a prevalent feature of the Giro or TdF this year

It’s because these stages suit breakaways, they are too hilly for the sprinters and their teams to control. So if a breakaway is going to win the day then the competition to get in the move is intense and riders and teams who miss a move going clear will chase so they can get in the next move, this is repeated until a strong move finally outpowers the chasers behind.

Well, no, but that’s because we had a cavalcade of them in the Tour to sate the appetite. And this is the Vuelta – you don’t expect large amounts of sprinting here – it’s part of the character of the race, just as a significant proportion of sprints is part of the character of the Tour, and other races.

Would I like to see sprint stages squeezed out of the other Grand Tours? Absolutely not – the sport would be much the poorer for it.

Pretty pissed off with the racing today, it is in danger of turning into WWE; main contenders seemed to knock off when Froome fell. Surely this is part of racing, all this respect for the Jersey is ruining the whole spectacle.

If they did, and if they did it was only briefly, then I can’t wait for the people who will say it was Froome’s fault they did… despite there being no evidence at all that Froome even expected them to wait. You’re right Lee that this is part of racing and certainly I had no problem with them riding on as fast as they liked.

Yeah… I straight up didn’t see this Lee, Nibali even stated as much – and Nibbers ain’t gonna wait for no one… think you have it wrong to be honest. Your eyes are deceiving you. I’m on the fence on the subject, when the race is on it’s fair game, but when not much is going down I like the gentleman’s agreements so we avoid someone losing for the wrong reasons. Today was all fine.

Nothing wrong with my eyes, I am convinced they slowed, Cycling Podcast seemed to back this up so if I am wrong then so be it. I find it difficult to believe that Froome would have clawed back that amount of time without those ahead easing up. On a wider point I think this ‘respect for the jersey’ is ruining grand tours as a spectacle; surely staying upright & selecting the right equipment to avoid punctures is part of racing? Froome is the strongest rider so his peers will need to seize all opportunities

I don’t think they slowed because they were thinking about waiting for Froome. Looked more like they were all trying to get each other to work. In the end, Nibali bluffed Astana into going on the front.

It did seem like a tactical error though – had Bahrain come straight to the front and worked they would probably have closed down Contador in fairly short order, and then everyone would have worked to pour a more significant gap into Froome.

Yes, it looked like a bit of disorganisation and confusion rather than any attempt to slow down. Contador was up the road and threatening them all, so no-one would expect them to wait. I did think it was telling that when Daniel Friebe asked about the pause/delay Nibali’s response was distinctly defensive and narky. I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to suggest that even if waiting was appropriate (Contador in the group & no GC threats up the road) that the ever charming Mr Nibbles would have dropped the hammer anyway and done his best to take advantage.

Anonymous. Discussion is one thing. Bringing up endless and unfounded accusations about one team becomes pretty boring for most here. If you don’t have any evidence, and you don’t, it’s probably best to give it a rest, or go over to cyclingnews where the comments might be more to your liking.

It’s not about freedom of speech, it’s about slandering a group of riders and officials from one team without the first shred of evidence for the accusations you are making. Give it a rest.

Anonymous. The team and individuals you appear to be obsessional with have NOT been found guilty of any wrong doing. Do you know who instigated the UK anti -doping enquiry, has it published a conclusion ? You probably don’t know the answer to either, so stop trolling and boring everybody without showing some understanding of the actuality and procedures.

Most come here for interesting views and insight from our host and other posters. Not uninformed trolling.

Different anonymous – there seem to be a few of us.
But we are not allowed to share our opinions.
We are trolls.
And the people who fling around the accusations of ‘troll’ to those who they disagree with are much the same ones who claim that they are looking after inrng, they don’t want this to turn into cyclingnews, they have been here for ages, not like these newcomers.
They are the ones who object to critical thinking or anything that goes against the conservative norm.
They are the ones who make personal comments (always whilst trying to obtain the moral high ground).
They have no idea how long people have been reading/posting here.
More importantly, they are the ones who, over the years, seem to have dissuaded more interesting posters who used to comment here from bothering to do so. Because if you post anything that goes against their imposed ideas of what is ok to post, you get personal insults.

Another option – exercise the freedom to ignore unfounded allegations and BS.

One of the unfortunate effects of the growth of the INRNG family is the frequency of the unfounded doping allegations and veiled references. Goes with the territory. Sure, they are free to write their suspicions in these online forums – as others are free to contradict them or ignore them.

No one is going t0 jail – no one’s freedom of speech is being curtailed; amazing how misunderstood that term is.

‘Bringing up endless and unfounded accusations’ – or ‘asking questions’.
It’s perfectly valid to look at Moscon’s performances and ask ‘Are they credible?’ This is cycling, after all: a sport with a very tainted history.
It’s also a sport where the public and media have been almost as involved in the omerta as the riders have.
As someone points out above, it’s not always about one team. Mention the name Valverde and see how long it takes for the phrase ‘unrepentant doper’ to crop up.
The usual, tired nonsense about ‘go to cyclingnews’ aimed at anyone who doesn’t toe the line of what the self-appointed guardians of inrng have decided can and cannot be said. I.e. very little about Sky; whatever you like about Astana/Katusha/Italians/Spaniards/anyone non-Anglo really.
I won’t bother to list the evidence of Sky’s behaviour – but it’s a lot more than a shred.
Many on this site wish to be blind to anything that suggests cycling has any kind of doping problem. I have no problem with that: I do have a problem with these people trying to force those who don’t share that view off this site.

You know what Anonymous? That’s rubbish. If Sky are cheats then prove it. I want to know they are and I want to know how they’ve been doing it. Because if they are and if Froome’s success is hollow then I’ve been duped and I don’t like being duped.

But this is what people like you never do. Instead your posts go something like this; innuendo, innuendo, innuendo. Innuendo, innuendo, innuendo. Jiffy bag, dodgy doctor from the past, TUE, innuendo.

Now who reading an informed cycling blog like this is UNAWARE of this? No one. Oh, maybe add in a video of Froome climbing Ventoux with numbers on it. This proves… well nothing really. Its just more innuendo.

I will be very happy if someone can prove Sky are cheats. Because it will be the truth. But all I see is hate masquerading as concern. But its concern that ever only goes one way. And that, as others say, is just boring. Its boring innuendo and not fact. Contador and steak is fact. Valverde the “unrepentant doper” is fact. Russian links to doping is fact. Astana have had multiple dope cases. Fact. Even Wiggins and his “hay fever” cure is fact (so he’s fair game and this reflects badly on Sky). But Sky the systematic dopers is not yet fact. It may be. But it also may not. Let’s see the smoking gun and not just the smoke from all the haters rubbing themselves to a frenzy.

Very hard to get proof of doping – and at no point did anyone here claim that they definitely knew.
There are many questions and cycling should not ignore them, as they did so many times in the past.
Over 55 doses of corticosteroid = fact.
No doctor would hand injections of these out so much in normal medical practice = fact.
Testosterone patches delivered = fact.
Delivery of drugs by mistake very unusual = fact.
Multiple accusations of tram@dol use = fact.
Many riders showing very rapid improvement at Sky as compared with the norm at other teams = fact.
Fans, media and UCI desperate to look the other way and not ask questions = fact.

dodgy doctor from the past – does Freeman no longer work for them?
Delivery of product from UK to France when it was available over the counter in France = fact, if it was that product.
Delivery boy never asked what was in it = fact if he’s telling the truth; what did he tell customs?
Team boss said he had no knowledge of corticosteroids = fact
Few weeks later he tells us he had them injected into his leg = fact.
There are a lot of facts and they don’t look good.

Is it my imagination, Or does Froome seem to have more mechanicals than most GC riders? Can this be connected to his unusual riding style?
I would like someone sensible to reply please, not a Froome hater or other lunatic . Just an honest enquiry from an ignoramus!

I don’t have any stats to hand but my instinct is that it’s just more noticeable with Froome because of his profile. Wikipedia tells me this is his 14th GT and he’s crashed out of two. Is one in seven a bad ratio? I don’t know. The likes of Indurain, Armstrong and Nibali never seem(ed) to crash out of GTs so I don’t think Froome’s ability in that department is up there with them, but it’s pretty common for GC riders to crash out. Contador, Quintana, Kruiswijck, Zakarin, Porte and Valverde all spring to mind in recent years at various GTs.

This came up during tour – Michael B is correct, it’s just because he’s more noticeable, all other GC contenders have hand them – maybe Nibali a little less so from recent memory – also Froome’s mechanical today was caused by a crash so not actually his mechanics fault. Don’t think Froome’s style has anything to do with any mechanicals, it’s not that weird. Osymetric chainrings used to have a rep, but Froome chain has rarely slipped.